EfcLLOW'S  PAMPHLETS 


"?3 


THE    INVERACITIES   OF 
ANTIVIVISECTION 


(4 


rft 


J 


W.     W.     KEEN,     M.D.,     LL.D. 

Emeritus    Professor    of    Surgery,    Jefferson    Medical    College 
PHILADELPHIA 


Reprinted  from    The  Journal   of  the  American   Medical  Association 
Nov.  4,  1916,   Vol.  LXVII,  pp.  1390  and  1391 


Copyright,  1916 

American    Medical   Association 

Five  Hundred  and  Thirty-Five  North  Dearborn  Street 

CHICAGO 


V 


THE     INVERACITIES     OF     ANTIVIVISECTION 


W.     W.     KEEN,     M.D.,     LL.D. 

Emeritus   Professor  of   Surgery,   Jefferson   Medical   College 

Philadelphia 


In  my  book  on  "Animal  Experimentation  and  Medical 
Progress"  I  wrote  as  follows : 

I  HAVE  BEEN  COMPELLED  TO  CONCLUDE  THAT  IT  IS  NOT 
SAFE  TO  ACCEPT  ANY  STATEMENT  WHICH  APPEARS  IN  ANTI- 
VIVISECTION  LITERATURE  AS  TRUE,  AND  ANY  QUOTATION  OR 
TRANSLATION  AS  CORRECT,  UNTIL  I  HAVE  COMPARED  THEM 
WITH  THE  ORIGINALS  AND  VERIFIED  THEIR  ACCURACY  FOR 
MYSELF. 

It  seems  to  be  curiously  impossible  for  the  antivivisectionists 
to  make  straightforward,  accurate  statements  of  fact,  or  even 
accurate  quotations.  As  to  the  latter,  I  have  shown  in  my 
book  very  many  misquotations,  mistranslations,  omissions,  and 
even  interpolations  not  in  the  originals. 

Two  recent  instances  and  a  third  of  a  somewhat  older  date, 
corroborating  my  statement,  occur  in  two  anti vivisection  jour- 
nals, the  Open  Door,  p.  5  of  the  issue  for  April,  1916,  and  the 
Journal  of  Zoophile  for  May,  1916,  p.  74,  and  the  Philadelphia 
Public  Ledger  of  Dec.  19,  1913. 

Dr.  Wile  of  the  University  of  Michigan  made  a  small 
trephine  opening  in  the  skulls  of  six  persons  who  had  become 
insane  as  a  result  of  paresis  (the  general  paralysis  of  the 
insane).  The  syphilitic  nature  of  this  disease,  which  is  a 
frequent  cause  of  insanity,  has  been  long  suspected  and  partly 
proved.  Wile  removed  a  very  small  portion  of  the  human 
brain  tissue  from  these  patients  and  injected  it  into  rabbits. 
The  result  of  this  injection  proved  conclusively  that  the  brain 
tissue  in  these  cases  was  full  of  the  active  germs  of  syphilis 
and  that  syphilis  is  the  cause  of  the  paresis. 

These  investigations,  however,  in  my  opinion,  were  wholly 
unjustifiable.  This  opinion,  too,  I  know  is  shared  by  others 
who,  like  myself,  are  warm  advocates  of  research  by  animal 
experimentation.  The  very  fact  that  we  can  obtain  informa- 
tion of  the  greatest  value  to  animals  and  human  beings  alike, 
by  experiments  on  animals  (which  are  almost  identical  with 
human  beings  both  in  structure  and  function)  is  the  strongest 
reason  why  we  should  utilize  animals  instead  of  human  beings. 
Hence  I  wish  to  register  here  my  condemnation  of  Dr.  Wile's 
experiments  and  a  protest  against  any  similar  experiments  in 
the  future. 


The  article  in  the  Open  Door  has  this  title : 

VIVISECTION     OF     THE     HUMAN     BRAIN 

By   Udo   J.    Wile,    M.D.,   Univ.    of   Michigan 

(Excerpts    from    Jour.    Experimental    Medicine,    Rockefeller    Institute, 
Feb.    1,    1916) 

The  first  paragraph  of  this  article  is  in  quotation  marks 
and  reads  thus : 

"The  aim  of  science  is  the  discovery  of  a  new  fact 
at  any  sacrifice  of  life.  ...  i  do  not  know  any 
higher  use  we  can  put  a  man  to. — professor  slosson." 

Then  follow  a  number  of  "excerpts"  from  Dr.  Wile's  paper, 
also  in  quotation  marks,  with  running  commentaries. 

Any  incautious  reader  would  think  that  Professor  Slosson 
was  a  red-handed  vivisectionist,  and  also  that  the  quotation 
from  Professor  Slosson  was  a  part  of  Dr.  Wile's  paper — a 
sort  of  motto  expressing  Wile's  own  sentiments.  Not  a  word 
of  this  quotation  from  Professor  Slosson  appears  in  Dr.  Wile's 
original  paper.  It  is  thrust  into  the  text  to  catch  the  eye  and 
mislead  the  reader.  Professor  Slosson's  communications 
appear  in  the  Independent  for  Dec.  12,  1895,  p.  1679,  and  Feb. 
13,  1896,  p.  207. 

As  I  suspected,  the  quotation  does  not  reproduce  (as  a  quo- 
tation always  should)  the  ipsissima  verba  of  the  author.  It 
should  read  : 

The  aim  of  Science  is  the  advancement  of  human 

KNOWLEDGE  AT  ANY  SACRIFICE  OF  HUMAN  LIFE.  .  .  .  We 
[NOT  "I"]  DO  NOT  KNOW  OF  ANY  HIGHER  USE  WE  CAN  PUT 
A    MAN    TO. 

But  while  changing  the  wording  of  an  excerpt  as  in  this 
case  is  blameworthy,  a  far  more  important  sin  is  an  inex- 
cusable but  evident  intention  to  make  a  wrong  impression  on 
the  mind  of  the  reader  by  this  isolated,  unqualified  quotation. 
In  his  paper,  Professor  Slosson  was  urging  young  men  to 
devote  a  lifetime  of  labor  to  the  advancement  of  knowledge 
as  the  highest  of  human  callings.  It  was  an  appeal  for  a 
life  of  self-sacrifice  and  devotion  to  scholarship  even  at  the 
cost  of  their  own  lives.  Among  the  fields  of  research  he  speci- 
fied physics,  mathematics,  geography  and  pathology,  sciences 
in  which  vivisection  is  never  employed.  He  expressly  dis- 
claimed (p.  208)  any  reference  to  the  sacrifice  of  other  people. 
Could  anything  be  clearer  than  the  following  additional  quota- 
tion which  I  take  from  Professor  Slosson's  paper? 

If   he   [the  investigator]    succeeds     .     .     .     HIS  VERY 

NAME  IS  SOON  DROPPED  FROM  THE  PARAGRAPH  HE  HAS  ADDED 
TO  THE  WORLD'S  KNOWLEDGE.  THIS  IS  AS  IT  SHOULD  BE 
.  .  .  IT  IS  FITTING  THAT  HIS  NAME  SHOULD  BE  FOR- 
GOTTEN WHILE  THE  TRUTH  FOR  WHICH  HE  GAVE  HIS  LIFE 
SHALL  LIVE   FOREVER. 


Viewed  in  this  new  light,  and  recalling  the  many  martyrs 
of  science,  who  would  not  say  that  Professor  Slosson  was 
absolutely  right?  Such  juggling  with  words,  even  though  the 
very  words  of  the  author,  should  receive  the  sternest  reproof. 

At  the  time  when  he  wrote  the  article  from  which  the  quo- 
tation is  taken,  Professor  Slosson  was  professor  of  chemistry 
in  the  University  of  Wyoming.  He  had  never  done  then, 
nor  has  he  ever  done  since,  any  experiments  on  animals.  Yet 
quoted  apart  from  the  text  and  without  the  explanation  1 
have  just  given,  readers  of  the  article  in  the  Open  Door  would 
inevitably  think  that  he  was  an  ardent  advocate  even  of  human 
vivisection. 

Later  in  his  paper,  Professor  Slosson  considers  vivisection ; 
but  again  the  sacrifice  of  human  life  to  which  he  alludes  is 
the  lives  of  the  experimenters  themselves. 

While  condemning  Dr.  Wile,  I  wish,  however,  to  be  just  to 
him.  Dr.  Wile  used  every  precaution  known  to  science — care- 
ful disinfection,  an  efficient  anesthetic,  great  care  in  selecting 
a  location  where  no  harm  would  be  done  to  the  brain  func- 
tions ;  and  the  prompt  recovery  of  all  the  patients  showed  that 
his  precautions  were  efficacious.  It  may  be  objected  that  Wile 
used  no  anesthetic  in  the  brain  itself.  This  was  wholly  unnec- 
essary as  the  brain  has  no  feeling  whatever.  I  well  remember 
a  case  thirteen  years  ago — a  terrible  crush  of  the  top  of  the 
skull  with  loss  of  much  bone  and  brain  substance.  Three  days 
after  the  accident,  when  I  was  slicing  and  even  scraping  away 
some  of  the  protruding  brain  substance,  the  patient,  fully  con- 
scious (as  there  was  no  need  for  an  anesthetic)  suffered  not 
the  least  pain,  but  shook  with  laughter  when  I  told  him  "he 
had  too  much  brains"  and  I  was  scraping  some  of  them  away. 
I  saw  him  within  a  year  in  perfect  condition  physically  and 
mentally. 

As  Dr.  Wile  did  not  state  in  his  article  whether  the  patients 
lived  or  died,  I  inquired  as  to  the  results.  Dr.  Victor  C. 
Vaughan,  dean  of  the  University  Medical  School,  in  which 
Dr.  Wile  works,  assures  me  that  not  one  of  the  patients  suf- 
fered any  ill  effects. 

Only  of  late  has  syphilis  been  definitely  recognized  as  the 
principal  cause  of  paresis,  which  blights  not  only  the  body 
but  so  often  eventually  destroys  the  mind.  Remedies — even 
salvarsan — which  may  be  efficient  in  curing  syphilitic  affections 
in  other  parts  of  the  body  do  not  reach  the  germs  in  the 
brain.  These  are  peculiarly  virulent.  As  a  result  of  Dr. 
Wile's  researches  it  may  hereafter  become  possible  in  the 
early  stages  of  the  disease  to  kill  these  germs  even  in  their 
remotest  stronghold.  We  may  then  be  able  to  combat  this 
dreadful  affliction  and  restore  both  the  bodies  and  the  minds 
of  these  unfortunates. 


Another  misrepresentation  of  Wile's  investigation  appears  in 
the  Journal  of  Zoophily.  It  says,  "A  long-nozzled  syringe  was 
inserted  .  .  .  and  a  syringeful  of  brain  contents  was 
extracted."  Dr.  Wile's  paper  distinctly  states  that  "a  small 
cylinder  of  gray  and  white  matter  with  some  fluid  from  the 
ventricle  was  removed."  No  "syringeful"  was  removed,  but 
only  a  "small  cylinder"  like  part  of  a  pin. 

The  sneer  of  the  Journal  of  Zoophily  that  Dr.  Wile  "used 
apparently  only  a  local  anesthetic"  shows  either  ignorance  or 
wilful  misrepresentation.  Many  hundreds — or  rather  thousands 
— of  operations  have  already  been  done  on  human  beings  by 
"only  a  local  anesthetic"  without  pain.  It  is  a  surgical  method 
of  anesthesia  as  well  recognized  as  that  by  ether  or  chloroform, 
and  has  largely  supplanted  other  anesthetics  in  certain  opera- 
tions, because  of  obvious  surgical  advantages. 

The  Journal  of  Zoophily  is  the  last  paper  which  should  urge 
any  objection  to  "human  vivisection,"  for  its  late  editor-in- 
chief,  Mrs.  Caroline  Earle  White,  was  an  avowed  advocate  of 
"human  vivisection." 

Replying  to  an  address  of  my  own  in  which  I  asserted  that 
experiments  "must  not  be  tested  first  upon  man"  she  asserted, 
"on  the  contrary  that  in  the  majority  of  cases  they  must  be 
tested  first  upon  man,  or  not  tested  at  all."  Now  if  no  new 
method  nor  any  new  drug  had  ever  been  tried,  either  on 
animals  or  man,  it  is  evident  that  we  should  today  be  still 
practicing  the  medicine  and  surgery  of  the  middle  ages. 

Still  further,  Mrs.  White  opposed  my  plea  for  attempting 
by  experiments  on  animals  to  discover  an  antidote  to  snake 
venom  which  in  India  kills  over  20,000  human  beings  every 
year.  She  actually  proposed  that  "the  experimenters  go  to 
India  where  they  could  find  as  large  a  field  ...  as  they 
require  in  the  poor  victims  themselves.  Here  is  an  opportu- 
nity such  as  is  not  often  offered  for  experimenting  on  human 
beings,  since  as  they  would  invariably  die  from  snake  bite 
there  can  be  no  objection  to  trying  upon  them  every  variety 
of  antidote  that  can  be  discovered."  This,  she  declared,  "is 
the  one  case  in  which  they  could  be  observed  with  so  much 
satisfaction  and  certainty  upon  man"  [all  italics  my  own]. 
Could  there  be  a  more  cruel — and  as  elsewhere  I  also  have 
shown — a  more  absurd  proposal? 

But  New  York  and  Philadelphia  must  not  claim  superiority 
in  misstatements  over  Boston.  In  the  Philadelphia  Public 
Ledger  of  Dec.  19,  1913,  Mrs.  Jessica  L.  C.  Henderson,  a 
resident  of  a  suburb  of  Boston,  and  a  vice  president  of  the 
American  Antivivisection  Society,  said : 

We  eagerly  offer  our  citations  in  the  hope  that 
the  public  will  take  the  trouble  to  verify  them. 
Doctor  Crile's  book,  from  which  the  antivivisection- 
ists  quoted  accurately,  repeatedly  describes  experi- 
ments followed  by  the  words  "no  anesthesia."  the 
book  has  been  withdrawn  from  public  sale. 


I  at  once  challenged  both  statements.  As  to  the  latter  state- 
ment the  book  has  never  been  "withdrawn."  No  more  copies 
were  for  sale  (except  possibly  second-hand)  simply  because  the 
entire  edition  had  been  "sold  out,"  the  publishers  inform  me. 

As  to  the  first  charge,  I  asked  Mrs.  Henderson  to  give  me 
the  pages  on  which  the  words  "no  anesthesia"  "repeatedly" 
occurred.  She  assured  me  in  reply  "that  at  the  first  oppor- 
tunity I  shall  vindicate  my  reputation."  Then  began  a  series 
of  excuses  and  subterfuges.  "The  days  and  the  hours  are  all 
too  few."  Next  it  is  her  "firm  conviction  that  the  edition  has 
been  recalled  and  another  issued"  in  which  these  culprit  words 
were  omitted.  This  was  disproved  by  the  statement  to  me  by 
the  publishers  (J.  B.  Lippincott  Company),  which  I  communi- 
cated to  her,  that  only  one  edition  of  Crile's  book  on  "Shock" 
had  ever  been  printed.  She  said  also  that  she  had  advertised 
for  a  copy  and  when  she  obtained  it  she  would  "at  once 
comply  with  your  .  [my]  request  for  the  page  numbers." 
Thereupon  I  sent  her  my  own  copy,  asking  her  to  return  it 
with  the  pages  indicated.  After  a  long  interval  it  was 
returned,  but  without  any  marked  pages. 

Next  she  claimed  that  she  had  not  indicated  which  book  by 
Dr.  Crile  was  the  one  in  which  these  words  appeared !  To 
this  I  replied  that  I  had  all  of  Dr.  Crile's  books  and  if  she 
would  indicate  which  was  the  guilty  one  I  would  send  it  to 
her  at  once.  This  offer  was  never  accepted.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  in  her  letter  to  the  Public  Ledger  she  did  indicate  which 
book  it  was,  for  she  described  it  as  the  one  "from  which  the 
antivivisectionists  quoted  accurately."  These  quotations  I  have 
compared  with  Dr.  Crile's  book  on  shock  and  found  that  they 
were  taken  from. his  book  on  shock,  and  for  a  wonder  they 
were  accurately  quoted.  I  have  "repeatedly"  reminded  Mrs. 
Henderson  that  I  am  "eagerly"  awaiting  her  "vindication" 
by  giving  me  the  pages,  but  a  long  period  of  eloquent  silence 
has  followed.  I  despair  of  ever  receiving  them.  A  good 
reason  exists — there  are  no  such  pages. 

Why  should  she  not  follow  the  example  of  her  illustrious 
co-worker,  the  late  Mrs.  White?  The  latter  had  stated  that 
certain  experiments  were  done  on  "between  forty  and  fifty 
children"  and  that  every  one  of  them  died.  When  the  fact 
was  pointed  out  to  her  that  "lumbar  puncture"  (now  an  every- 
day and  often  indispensable  means  of  diagnosis)  was  done  on 
only  twenty-seven  living  children  of  whom  only  fourteen  died 
(not  one  of  whom  died  from  the  lumbar  puncture,  but  from 
the  various  diseases  of  which  they  were  the  victims),  she 
promptly  and  publicly  acknowledged  her  error.  Mrs.  Hender- 
son owes  it  to  Dr.  Crile,  but  above  all  to  herself,  to  acknowl- 
edge that  her  statement  was  incorrect  and  to  offer  an  apology 
to  Dr.  Crile.  Had  Mrs.  Henderson's  charge  been  private,  my 
reply  would  have  been  also  private ;  but  her  charge  was  spe- 
cific and  public,  and  made  in  a  very  widely  circulated  and 
responsible  newspaper;  hence  my  public  reply. 


But  what  can  one  expect  from  persons  who  heartlessly  call 
the  recent  terrible  epidemic  of  infantile  paralysis  as  "the 
Summer's  Foolish  Panic"  and  "the  New  York  Infantile 
Paralysis  Epidemic  a  Fake"  and  commend  the  treatment  by 
the  Chinese  who  "divide  the  human  body  into  twelve  sections 
all  connected  by  interlacing  nerves,"  each  section  being 
"rooted  in  some  vital  organ"!     {Open  Door,  October,  1916.) 

1729  Chestnut  Street. 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2012  with  funding  from 
Duke  University  Libraries 


http://www.archive.org/details/inveracitiesofanOOkeen 


*W  M£D.  C£m£R 


LIB. 


DUKE     MED.     CENTER     LIB. 
HISTORICAL    COLLECTION 


